Employers think of diversity training as something focused on
understanding other groups, but new academic research finds more understanding
may be needed between members of the same group, as well.

By David Shadovitz

Thursday, February 28, 2013

At the
mention of racial bias, you typically think of discrimination involving two
different groups. But a recent study suggests you might want to broaden your
definition.

Researchers
at the University of Virginia surveyed more than 200 black students at UVA and
Piedmont Virginia Community College and found that more than 65 percent experienced
some form of in-group discrimination.

While
the research was limited to black college students, one of the study's authors
suggests the findings might shed some light on in-group dynamics in the
workplace as well.

Often,
employers think of diversity training as something focused on understanding
other groups, says Joanna Williams, assistant professor at the Curry School of
Education at the University of Virginia, co-author of the study. "But this
study confirms that conflict can happen within a particular group, too."

Williams'
and doctoral student Myles Durkee's research -- which is currently under review
for publication -- found that in-group discrimination among blacks frequently involved
attacking a person's "authenticity."

"Students
were told that they weren't acting black enough," Williams says. "Some
were explicitly told they were acting white."

Williams
notes that the research also found patterns of language use, lightness of skin
color or attire were often singled out.

Women,
in particular, were on the receiving end of such comments, she says.

To
arrive at their findings, Williams and Durkee asked those surveyed to indicate
whether they had ever experienced negative treatment from someone in their own
racial or ethnic group, and how old they were the first and last time they
encountered it. Participants were also asked to describe an event involving
in-group discrimination and its timing.

In
light of these findings, Williams suggests that employers might want to revisit
their diversity training initiatives.

"Oftentimes,
we think of diversity training as focused on understanding other groups, but I think
some recognition that conflict can also happen within groups is important and
necessary [and should be incorporated into your training initiatives],"
she says.

Williams
admits that in-group bias can be a sensitive issue to discuss, but believes
organizations shouldn't use that as an excuse to ignore it.

Newsletter Sign-Up:

Mark
Kaplan, a workplace diversity expert and principal at The Dagoba Group in
Salisbury, N.H., notes that the issue of in-group bias is something he's
encountered in his travels.

"Whether
you're a woman, a person of color or openly gay, when you're put in a position
of leadership, it's possible that you can be tougher on members of your own
group … because you don't want to be seen as being biased to your own group,"
says Kaplan, who is co-author of a forthcoming book, The Inclusion Divide:
Why Investing in Diversity & Inclusion Pays Off.

"The
stereotype is that if a woman is put in charge of a group, she's going to give
the advantage to other women," he says. "But I think that the
opposite actually happens, because she doesn't want to seem to give [other
women] the advantage."

To
address this issue, Kaplan says, employers need to do a better job holding
their leaders accountable for their actions.

Further,
he says, talent management and acquisition processes need to have controls in
them that prevent bias from happening in the first place.

But he
also adds a word for caution for employers: Don't fall into the trap of
focusing too much on intragroup dynamics and take your focus away from the
larger systemic issues facing your business.